Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6 ... 10  Next

Oops make that 750,000...no thousand after that

   

We can already do that. We can pay out of pocket for private care if we wish, but many choose to just use the public system.

eg:
http://timelymedical.ca/?gclid=CL-98IWY ... KgodaThnKA
http://www.wecare.ca/?gclid=CKqx_YuYnq4CFQIRNAod7hllKg
http://www.canmagnetic.com/?gclid=CMXhq ... QAodjiPlcQ

   

Yep. And the European systems that are doing better than we are make even more provision for that, while still providing health care for everybody.

It would be great if Canada could take what works best from the European systems, but with health being a provincial responsibility and with those numbnuts living next door to us, I don't think we'll ever get there. Probably just keep bitching about it til the Reformacons get their way and the whole thing collapses into the US style mess.

   

True but both the US and Canada have the disadvantage of a large geography. The countries higher on the list are much smaller in area and therefore have more compact populations. As a result there is less need for duplication of effort in order to serve the population.

   

Canada is a largely urban country. I don't think your argument holds water. By your argument there should be no problems with health delivery in large urban centers in Canada. Our problem is the political organization that diffuses power to the provinces. Those countries with better health care systems have a strong central govt that can mandate good universal care. And they don't live next door to a bunch of nutjobs, so they don't have to worry about introducing a private system without it destroying the public one. And they have a populations that believes much more in the role of the state than we do, aren't constantly bombarded with bullshit messages about the evil of the state.

   

Some dismiss it as legend, but there is a Canada outside the Quebec City-Windsor Corridor. I've seen it with my own eyes, and I wasn't turned into stone.

   

See many people?


This is the percentage of the total Canadian population that resides in urban areas.


can_popurb.gif [ 12.37 KiB | Viewed 705 times ]

   

You see that as a negative and what I see are 750,000 people who will be prohibited by law from seeking such care under the new regime.

Bear in mind, most of that 750,000 medical tourists do so to save money and to obtain unapproved treatments, not because they can't afford treatment. Obviously, if they can afford to travel they can afford medical care.

A good for instance is that for some ten years or so Americans had to travel to Canada to obtain Lasik treatment as it was approved in Canada long before it was approved here. We also have cancer patients who go to Europe to try experimental treatments that are not allowed here.

   

I live in BC one of the LAST provinces to charge health care premiums. They just raised it to $67 a month.
You want to bitch about paying $67 a month because 'someone else' like your own Granpa might be using $3 of it? Let's hear what you pay.
Before you like many Americans say 'nothing, my employer pays' think about just WHY your employers thinking about relocating to China. It's one of the reasons. And the solution is to stop the whole rest of the world from subsidizing health care? As about as abhorrent as forcing people to pay private companies a premium.

   

The term "entitlement" (when used as a noun) refers to a guarantee of availability of federal benefits in the USA. Congress can cut the operating budget of non-entitlement benefits or welfare programs to fit budgetary needs, but Congress has no discretion over whether to fund entitlement programs. If a qualified individual is for any reason unable to attain entitlement benefits, they can sue the federal government to get the money that, under the law, they are entitled to. They cannot do the same for other benefits or welfare programs. Entitlement is not a "neo-con buzzword," it's a legal designation.

US neoconservatives are quite likely to support entitlement benefits on principle, since the idea that the individual "owns" their benefits is a more individualistic means of distributing those government benefits that neoconservatives find morally necessary and fiscal conservatives perhaps nice but not government's primary or fundamental role. You seem to be applying the term "neo-con" to the wrong side of that schism.

Your argument might be true in Canada (I don't think Canadian citizens can ever sue for access to government benefits, so adapting American rhetoric including the term "entitlement" to Canadian issues quickly becomes a logical fallacy), but when applied to the USA it only demonstrates a fundamental ignorance of US federal law.

Some sources: a definition from a legal website, a benefits law that describes itself as an Entitlement, a US Supreme Court decision related to entitlements (specifically, it holds that government benefits are not covered by 14th Amendment protection against seizure of property without due process, but entitlement programs are; this is because the law recognizes the government as the owner of benefits, but the individual as owner of entitlements).

   

The War of 1812 was fought between the UK and the US. Tell me an engagement where Canadians (besides the Mohawks) took a major role?

All this "Canada did this..." is a load of old bollocks.

You guys have mostly disregarded your British heritage in favour of the cult of multicult and New France but pretend you beat the Yanks in 1814 and that you burnt the Whitehouse. Naughty fibbers!

   

Well we certainly didn't burn the whitehouse but Candian Militia regiments did fight.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_units_of_the_War_of_1812

Charles de Salaberry, who was not a Brit, repelled the US invasion of Lower Canada with militia of local French-Canadians, who at the time, were referred to as "Canadiens".

   

Don't forget those mutineering Scots...

The Canadian Fencibles

First recruited in Scotland in 1803. The Scottish recruits feared that they were about to be "crimped" for service in India or other unhealthy posts, and mutinied. Eventually, the unit was recruited from the French-speaking peoples of Lower Canada.

   

Really? Do you take a dim view when you have a to pay for other's police services, fire protection, water supply, sewer access and the myriad of other services that your taxes pay for others to access?

   

Ok no more talk of Healthcare or this is locked.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6 ... 10  Next